Medical housing "lines".

General practitioners are often asked for medical certificates (housing "lines") by applicants for council housing who claim to have medical problems requiring housing priority. The results of a survey by questionnaire showed that general practitioners in Edinburgh do not know how the housing system works and that they seem to overestimate their patients'' chances of obtaining suitable council housing. General practitioners need to know how the housing system works, and communication between general practitioners and housing departments should be improved. A comparison was also made between the number of medical points awarded by a community medicine specialist and a group of general practitioners who had written housing "lines" for their patients. The general practitioners tended to award more points than the specialist. Social priority for housing should be recognised as an independent factor and a new category of top social priority added.     

Improving care: a study of orthopaedic outpatient referrals.

OBJECTIVE--To identify aspects of outpatient referral in which general practitioners'', consultants'', and patients'' satisfaction could be improved. DESIGN--Questionnaire survey of general practitioners, consultant orthopaedic surgeons, and patients referred to an orthopaedic clinic. SETTING--Orthopaedic clinic, Doncaster Royal Infirmary. SUBJECTS--628 consecutive patients booked into the orthopaedic clinic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Views of the general practitioners as recorded both when the referral letter was received and again after the patient had been seen, views of the consultants as recorded at the time of the clinic attendance, and views of the patients as recorded immediately after the clinic visit and some time later. RESULTS--Consultants rated 213 of 449 referrals (42.7%) as possibly or definitely inappropriate, though 373 of 451 patients (82.7%) reported that they were helped by seeing the consultant. Targets for possible improvement included information to general practitioners about available services, communication between general practitioners and consultants, and administrative arrangements in clinics. Long waiting times were a problem, and it seemed that these might be reduced if general practitioners could provide more advice on non-surgical management. Some general practitioners stated that they would value easier telephone access to consultants for management advice. It was considered that an alternative source of management advice on musculoskeletal problems might enable more effective use to be made of specialist orthopaedic resources. Conclusion--A survey of patients'' and doctors'' views of referrals may be used to identify aspects in which the delivery of care could be made more efficient. Developing agreed referral guidelines might help general practitioners to make more effective use of hospital services.     

Adding retinal photography to screening for diabetic retinopathy: a prospective study in primary care.

OBJECTIVE--To evaluate whether adding retinal photography improved community screening for diabetic retinopathy. SETTING--Mobile screening unit at rural and urban general practices in south west England. SUBJECTS--1010 diabetic patients from primary care. DESIGN--Prospective study; patients were examined by ophthalmoscopy by general practitioners or opticians without fundal photographs and again with photographs, and assessments were compared to those of an ophthalmologist. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Whether fundal photography improved the sensitivity of detection of retinopathy and referrable diabetic retinopathy, and whether this sensitivity could be improved by including a review of the films by the specialist. RESULTS--Diabetic retinopathy was detected by the ophthalmologist in 205 patients (20.5%) and referrable retinopathy in 49 (4.9%). The sensitivity of the general practitioners and opticians for referrable retinopathy with ophthalmoscopy was 65%, and improved to 84% with retinal photographs. General practitioners'' sensitivity in detecting background retinopathy improved with photographs from 22% to 65%; opticians'' sensitivity in detecting background retinopathy improved from 43% to 71%. The sensitivity of detecting referrable retinopathy by general practitioners improved from 56% to 80% with photographs; for opticians it improved from 75% to 88%. CONCLUSIONS--Combining modalities of screening by providing photography with specialist review of all films in addition to direct ophthalmoscopy through dilated pupils improves assessment and referral for diabetic retinopathy by general practitioners and opticians. With further training and experience, primary care screeners should be able to achieve a sensitivity that will achieve an effective, acceptable, and economical community based screening programme for this condition.     

Secondary care beyond Tomlinson: an opportunity to be seized or squandered?

The Tomlinson report''s emphasis on primary care and its essentially quantitative analysis of hospital care in London leaves little space for a picture of how secondary care for Londoners should look. In this article Fiona Moss and Martin McNicol argue that most outpatient work does not need to be done in hospitals. With proper organisation and better premises a genuinely specialist consultative service can be provided in primary health care centres, with benefit to patients and communication between primary and secondary care doctors. Hospitals would then house those outpatient services that needed major investigative facilities and much reduced inpatient capacity. It may no longer be necessary for each acute unit to offer a full range of services. Such a pattern of secondary care will have implications for the organisation of accident and emergency services and for postgraduate training. Above all Moss and McNicol argue that Tomlinson''s recommendations demand that general practitioners and specialists should re-examine the services hospitals provide and agree on the best settings for different sorts of health care and the most appropriate skills to provide it.     

Usefulness of letters from hospitals to general practitioners.

In an investigation of the communication between specialist hospital departments and general practitioners 97 general practitioners were asked to say how important selected items of information that the hospital could pass on would be for management of a patient receiving chemotherapy. In addition, the records of 68 patients were examined for coverage of these topics. General practitioners considered technical topics to be more important than social ones. Hospital letters covered technical topics well, apart from details of possible side effects, but did not do the same even for the two social topics that most doctors considered to be essential--namely, what patients have been told about their diagnosis and prognosis. Letters from hospitals to general practitioners cover technical topics well but should include more information relating to the social aspects of the patient''s disease.     

Creating a new drug service in Edinburgh.

After one year Edinburgh''s Community Drug Problem Service has shown that if psychiatric services offer consultation and regular support for drug users many general practitioners will share the care of such patients and prescribe for them, under contract conditions, whether the key worker is a community psychiatric nurse or a drug worker from a voluntary agency. This seems to apply whether the prescribing is part of a "harm reduction" strategy over a long period or whether it is a short period of methadone substitution treatment. Given the 50% prevalence of HIV infection among drug users in the Edinburgh area and the fact that only half of them have been tested for seropositivity, the health and care of this demanding group of young people with a chaotic lifestyle are better shared among primary care, community based drug workers, and specialist community drugs team than treated exclusively by a centralised hospital drug dependency unit. As the progression to AIDS is predictable in a larger proportion of drug users who are positive for HIV, there is an even greater need for coordinated care between specialists and community agencies in the near future.     

Long-term digoxin treatment in general practice.

A questionnaire was sent to several general practitioners and specialists in an attempt to obtain a consensus on standards of care for patients receiving long-term digoxin treatment. The consultants'' suggested standards were slightly more stringent than those of the general practitioners. The records of 42 patients taking digoxin under the care of two general practitioners were studied to see how far their actual care matched up to the suggested standards. The models of management proposed by these patients'' doctors were only slightly different from those suggested by other practitioners, but measured against these models the patients'' care was in some cases inadequate. Nevertheless, there was little relationship between the recorded levels of care and the health of the patient, and it may have been the standard of recording rather than the care that was inadequate. Measuring plasma digoxin levels in these patients proved to be of little value. Medical audit is thus a useful tool in helping the general practitioner to review his work and improve his knowledge, but it may not be a practical or true way of measuring the quality of care.     

How valuable is feedback of information on hospital referral patterns?

OBJECTIVES--To determine general practitioners'' responses to and explanations for variation in rates of referral to hospital and how feedback of data on rates of referral could be used to facilitate practices in auditing their own referral behaviour. DESIGN--Visits by audit facilitators to general practices after feedback of details of rates of referral to hospital derived from annual reports in general practice. SETTING--92 general practices in East Anglia. RESULTS--General practitioners judged that access to specialist care, the individual skill of general practitioners, patient demand, and fear of litigation were major determinants of referral behaviour. Because there was widespread scepticism about the accuracy of the data on which the feedback was based and because there is no clear relation between rates of referral and quality of care, it was extremely difficult to encourage doctors to use the feedback as a basis for auditing their own hospital referrals. CONCLUSION--If general practitioners are to contribute meaningfully to monitoring future changes in referral patterns it will be essential to develop reliable information systems in which doctors have confidence. Furthermore, audits need to be based on analysis of clinical cases rather than on rates of referral.     

Survey of general practitioners' attitudes to AIDS in the North West Thames and East Anglian regions

As the numbers of people suffering from human immunodeficiency virus infection and the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) increase, so will the contribution to care required from general practice. A postal questionnaire survey was therefore carried out among general practitioners in the North West Thames and East Anglian regions to determine their attitudes to AIDS and the issues it raises for them. One hundred and thirty seven questionnaires were returned (response rate 57%) and four factors underlying the doctors'' attitudes identified; these concerned disease control, general practitioner care, patient support, and perception of seriousness. There were wide divergencies of attitude among the general practitioners, younger doctors being more in line with specialist thinking on AIDS than older colleagues, and evidence of important gaps between policies advocated by AIDS specialists and bodies of opinion in general practice.Attitudes to AIDS in general practice may partly be a function of personal experience; further study is required.     

Findings of a national survey of the role of general practitioners in the treatment of opiate misuse: dealing with the opiate misuser.

Because there has been a substantial increase in the scale of drug misuse general practitioners have become increasingly concerned in responding to this problem. Little is known, however, about how general practitioners manage drug misusers. The findings from a national survey carried out in mid-1985 of a 5% random sample of general practitioners in England and Wales show the extent to which various actions were undertaken by general practitioners who reported on the consultation with the opiate misuser whom they last attended. In more than half of the cases the opiate misuser had been under the care of the general practitioners for this problem for at least six months. The findings indicate that most general practitioners refer these patients to specialist drug dependence clinics or to general psychiatric services but rarely to other agencies. Opiate drugs had been prescribed in nearly a third of cases. The rate of notification to the Home Office conforms with that in other studies and indicates a high degree of undernotification. More detailed study of general practitioners'' activities in managing drug misusers is needed.     

Specialist outreach clinics in general practice.

OBJECTIVES--To establish the extent and nature of specialist outreach clinics in primary care and to describe specialists'' and general practitioners'' views on outreach clinics. DESIGN--Telephone interviews with hospital managers. Postal questionnaire surveys of specialists and general practitioners. SETTING--50 hospitals in England and Wales. SUBJECTS--50 hospital managers, all of whom responded. 96 specialists and 88 general practitioners involved in outreach clinics in general practice, of whom 69 (72%) and 46 (52%) respectively completed questionnaires. 122 additional general practitioner fundholders, of whom 72 (59%) completed questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Number of specialist outreach clinics; organisation and referral mechanism; waiting times; perceived benefits and problems. RESULTS--28 of the hospitals had a total of 96 outreach clinics, and 32 fundholders identified a further 61 clinics. These clinics covered psychiatry (43), medical specialties (38), and surgical specialties (76). Patients were seen by the consultant in 96% (107) of clinics and general practitioners attended at only six clinics. 61 outreach clinics had shorter waiting times for first outpatient appointment than hospital clinics. The most commonly reported benefits for patients were ease of access and shorter waiting times. CONCLUSIONS--Specialist outreach clinics cover a wide range of specialties and are popular, especially in fundholding practices. These clinics do not seem to have increased the interaction between general practitioners and specialists.     

A randomized controlled trial investigation of a non-stimulant in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ACTION): Rationale and design

Background

Patients with delirium and dementia admitted to general hospitals have poor outcomes, and their carers report poor experiences. We developed an acute geriatric medical ward into a specialist Medical and Mental Health Unit over an eighteen month period. Additional specialist mental health staff were employed, other staff were trained in the 'person-centred' dementia care approach, a programme of meaningful activity was devised, the environment adapted to the needs of people with cognitive impairment, and attention given to communication with family carers. We hypothesise that patients managed on this ward will have better outcomes than those receiving standard care, and that such care will be cost-effective.

Methods/design

We will perform a controlled clinical trial comparing in-patient management on a specialist Medical and Mental Health Unit with standard care. Study participants are patients over the age of 65, admitted as an emergency to a single general hospital, and identified on the Acute Medical Admissions Unit as being 'confused'. Sample size is 300 per group. The evaluation design has been adapted to accommodate pressures on bed management and patient flows. If beds are available on the specialist Unit, the clinical service allocates patients at random between the Unit and standard care on general or geriatric medical wards. Once admitted, randomised patients and their carers are invited to take part in a follow up study, and baseline data are collected. Quality of care and patient experience are assessed in a non-participant observer study. Outcomes are ascertained at a follow up home visit 90 days after randomisation, by a researcher blind to allocation. The primary outcome is days spent at home (for those admitted from home), or days spent in the same care home (if admitted from a care home). Secondary outcomes include mortality, institutionalisation, resource use, and scaled outcome measures, including quality of life, cognitive function, disability, behavioural and psychological symptoms, carer strain and carer satisfaction with hospital care. Analyses will comprise comparisons of process, outcomes and costs between the specialist unit and standard care treatment groups.

Trial Registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01136148     

Self referral to an accident and emergency department for another opinion.

OBJECTIVE--To determine whether patients referring themselves to an accident and emergency department for another opinion after consulting their general practitioner present with serious illness, show any risk factors for being admitted, or are more likely to be patients of particular practitioners. DESIGN--Six month prospective survey. SETTING--District general hospital''s accident and emergency department, receiving 42,000 new patients a year. PATIENTS--180 Patients identified as attending for another opinion having already consulted a general practitioner. INTERVENTIONS--Classified as admission, referral to specialist clinic, follow up in accident and emergency department, or referral back to general practitioner. END POINT--Admission, with an analysis of admitted patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS--General outcome, diagnostic category, age, time of attendance, time since seen by general practitioner, and name of general practitioner were recorded. Forty seven patients were admitted, 99 were discharged back to the general practitioner (62 without a letter), and two died. Patients were most likely to be admitted if they attended within 24 hours after seeing a general practitioner, were aged under 5, or presented with respiratory or gastrointestinal complaints. Some general practitioners were overrepresented. CONCLUSIONS--Important disorders present in this way, and therefore these patients should be seen by a doctor. Information about these attendances could be useful to general practitioners in reviewing their performance.     

Fundholding: a two tier system?

The Calverton practice is one of 30 fundholding practices in Nottinghamshire. Three years after the inception of fundholding, it has achieved a lower outpatient waiting time for its specialist clinics than non-fundholding practices in the region. Its district nursing and health visiting services have been strengthened. Prescribing costs remain below the national average, and making further cost reductions has not been easy. The business plan has allowed the practice to work within a defined budget and develop expertise in the purchasing of services. Through the provision of specialist clinics and increased patient demand the workload of general practitioners has risen by 15% in the past year. But fundholding is still a minority activity in Nottinghamshire--a non-fundholders'' group has been set up to ensure that purchasing of good quality secondary care is equitably distributed among all patients, and this group is extremely active.     

Prescribing at the hospital-general practice interface. II: Impact of hospital outpatient dispensing policies in England on general practitioners and hospital consultants.

OBJECTIVE--To assess the impact on general practitioners and hospital consultants of hospital outpatient dispensing policies in England. DESIGN--Postal questionnaire and telephone interview survey of general practitioners and hospital consultants in January 1991. SETTING--94 selected major acute hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS--20 general practitioners in the vicinity of each of 94 selected hospitals and eight consultants from each, selected by chief pharmacists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Proportions of general practitioners unable to assume responsibility for specialist drugs and of consultants wishing to retain responsibility; association between dispensing restrictions and the frequency of general practitioners being asked to prescribe hospital initiated treatments. RESULTS--Completed questionnaires were obtained from 1207 (64%) of 1887 general practitioners and 457 (63%) of 729 consultants. 570 (46%) general practitioners felt unable to take responsibility for certain treatments, principally because of difficulty in detecting side effects (367, 30%), uncertainty about explaining treatment to patients (332, 28%), and difficulty monitoring dosage (294, 24%). Among consultants 328 (72%) wished to retain responsibility, principally because of specialist need for monitoring (93, 20%), urgent need to commence treatment (64, 14%), and specialist need to initiate or stabilise treatment (63, 14%). The more restricted the drug supply to outpatients, the more frequently consultants asked general practitioners to prescribe (p less than 0.01) and complete a short course of treatment initiated by the hospital (p less than 0.001). CONCLUSIONS--Restrictive hospital outpatient dispensing shifts clinical responsibility on to general practitioners. Hospital doctors should be able to retain responsibility for prescribing when the general practitioner is unfamiliar with the drug or there is a specialist need to initiate, stabilise, or monitor treatment.     

Social Case-work in General Practice: An Alternative Approach

During a two-year period a senior case-worker was seconded by a voluntary family case-work agency, the Liverpool Personal Service Society, to work with three general practitioners. The commonest reasons for referral of the 157 new patients to the social worker over this study period were extreme poverty; housing, matrimonial, and psychiatric problems; and problems of fatherless families. The successful and valuable co-operation between the general practitioners, case-worker, and various specialist professional and financial services of the Society have proved that a professional social worker has an important role in the general-practice team.     

Barriers to Advance Care Planning in Cancer,Heart Failure and Dementia Patients: A Focus Group Study on General Practitioners' Views and Experiences

Background

The long-term and often lifelong relationship of general practitioners (GPs) with their patients is considered to make them the ideal initiators of advance care planning (ACP). However, in general the incidence of ACP discussions is low and ACP seems to occur more often for cancer patients than for those with dementia or heart failure.

Objective

To identify the barriers, from GPs'' perspective, to initiating ACP and to gain insight into any differences in barriers between the trajectories of patients with cancer, heart failure and dementia.

Method

Five focus groups were held with GPs (n = 36) in Flanders, Belgium. The focus group discussions were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the method of constant comparative analysis.

Results

Three types of barriers were distinguished: barriers relating to the GP, to the patient and family and to the health care system. In cancer patients, a GP''s lack of knowledge about treatment options and the lack of structural collaboration between the GP and specialist were expressed as barriers. Barriers that occured more often with heart failure and dementia were the lack of GP familiarity with the terminal phase, the lack of key moments to initiate ACP, the patient''s lack of awareness of their diagnosis and prognosis and the fact that patients did not often initiate such discussions themselves. The future lack of decision-making capacity of dementia patients was reported by the GPs as a specific barrier for the initiation of ACP.

Conclusion

The results of our study contribute to a better understanding of the factors hindering GPs in initiating ACP. Multiple barriers need to be overcome, of which many can be addressed through the development of practical guidelines and educational interventions.     

Underprivileged areas: validation and distribution of scores.

Underprivileged areas were identified by weighting several census variables that relate to social conditions, by using weights determined by means of a questionnaire sent to one in 10 of the general practitioners in the United Kingdom. The weighted variables were added (after statistical manipulation) to give a score for each of the 9265 electoral wards in England and Wales. Blank ward maps were sent to general practitioners in five family practitioner committee areas and they were asked to shade the wards according to the degree to which the population increased their workload or the pressure on their services. Maps of these same areas were then prepared by using the calculated scores with the cut off points between the worst, the intermediate, and the best areas as on those used by the general practitioners. The two sets of maps were then compared to determine how well the maps that were based on scores agreed with the general practitioners'' maps showing their assessment of the variation of workload in their areas. Overall, 6.3% of the wards differed in shading in any way between the two sets of maps. In the three areas where the general practitioners shaded complete wards and did not report having difficulties with shading only 1.2% of the wards differed. It may be possible to use these "underprivileged area" scores to indicate where problems occur for general practitioners and to extend this work to other primary health care workers.     

The American General Practitioner in Hospital

In the U.S.A. and Canada full access of general practitioners to hospital beds and facilities is regarded as an essential privilege of their work. All hospital constitutions require a review of the credentials of staff applicants and continuing evaluation of their performance. Staff appointment carries administrative as well as clinical responsibilities and hospital work occupies a considerable proportion of the general practitioner''s day. The disciplinary machinery for safeguarding standards is strict by comparison with British hospital practice.This system produces an obvious excellence of clinical standards, postgraduate education, and communication between specialist and general practitioner and is attractive to the more able young British graduate. A pilot experiment of hospital staffing on North American lines in one of our new district general hospitals would be a worthwhile proposition.